SP10 Mk II vs Mk III

You do NOT have to take the electronics away. You are doing absolutely NOTHING to the electronics nor the switches. The motor is mounted to the stock chassis and there is a bundle of 12 wires soldered to a 12-pin connector connected to one of the circuit boards. All you're doing is to extend the wires by a few feet and mount the motor to something more solid like a slate, plywood, or butcher block or whatever. The stock chassis is acting as housing for the electronics and switches, so for the Start/Stop and speed change functions you still need to use stock chassis.

Apparently you never removed the platter out of the SP10. The platter has about 1/4" flat area below the beveled edge. If I install two SP10 motors outside of the stock chassis then I can have one platter driving the next one without any speed adjustment because they are one to one ratio in diameter and I will use 1/4" magnetic tape, something thin to have no effect on speed. I have done this experiment with two Pioneer turntables before and I prefer the sound in this arrangement than in DD mode. But DD is usually a little more dynamic though. If I have the budget when I win the lottery, I would use a SP10mk3 to tape-drive a Micro-Seiki platter, since the Mk3 has speed adjustment.

Here are some pictures from a Japanese website applying the Kaneta mod so ignore the DIY electronics but the images give you a better idea of the motor and chassis.
http://homepage2.nifty.com/~mhitaste/audiotop/audio_apparatus_page/sp-10mk2.html

The cut out hole can be between 5-7/8" to 6".

FWIW, I have removed and replaced the platters from two different SP10s, a MkII and a Mk2A, in order to lubricate their bearings and in order to replace electrolytic caps in the electonic module. (In medical training the aphorism regarding procedures is "see one, do one, teach one".) I simply forgot about the flat area on the edge of the platter because it is not visible when the tt is put back together. However, as I recall, it is pretty narrow with no ridges to prevent a belt or tape from wandering off course. But if it works for you, that's all that counts.

I know all about the Kaneta modification, but he re-designed the electronics (as far as I can tell without being able to read any of the Japanese text), so his work is (probably) not relevant to the question of whether lengthening the leads will negatively affect function of the stock servo mechanism. Again, if it works for you, then I may be wrong to worry about it.

So I now finally get the picture that you use the stock chassis intact as a housing for the electronics that don't go into the plinth. Do you do anything cosmetically to cover the hole left by the motor/platter et al?

Thanks for the idea.

I plan to have no cosmetic embellishment. I like everything exposed, or naked if you will. :-) Not having a spouse helps. But if that's an aesthetic issue for some people, I understand. I am the kind of audiophile who ALWAYS loses the screws on an amp or preamp because I am always tinkering with the inside, such as changing caps, tubes, etc,... so the covers are always off.

I like things neat and organize just like next guy but I just can't sit still for too long so I always end up messing up the sound. LOL. However, when listening to music I am like a zen master, completely immerse myself into it, even AM radio. I guess there's a difference between listening to music and listening to sound. The day when sound and music become indistinguishable then that's the day I stop messing around with gears.

Dear Lewm/Hiho: I agree with you that the DD stock DD plinths degrade its quality performance and I'm still " against " any plinth with the SP-10s.

I'm still using one of my SP-10s ( with out electronic mods. )with out plinth and tonearm mounted in a stand alone tonearm-tower ( I don't either " buy " the statement that the tonearm/TT has to be in the same " house ", the ears tell me I don't have to worry about: huge improvement. ).

As I posted I hear/heard several Sp-10s configurations in several different audio systems, including at least two-three SP-10s of the people that posted in this thread.

IMHO no one of those SP-10s can even the quality performance of a " naked " Sp-10.
I like all those plinths ( especially the SD ones. ) that are just beautiful but if you don't care about how that/your TT looks and cares how to achieve the top quality performance you can/could achieve with the Sp-10s ( and other great DD out there. ) my advise is to try the full " naked " alternative ( you can always return to your today TT configuration. ).

IMHO I think that is worth to try it, at the " end of the day " why everyone already work on all those SP-10 mods ( electronics, mats, plinths, cables, etc, etc. )?, I understand that is to improve its quality performance: well what I'm saying is that after all those SP-10 mods there is more " land " to explore in favor of better quality performance ( TT neutrality. ).

Anyway I think that this thread and its posts are saying to today TT designers/builders that they have to have better products in the near future because all those vintage TT's are in many ways even better than today TT designs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Dear Raul, You were once kind enough to post photos of your SP10 with "no plinth". As I recall it does sit in a piece of plywood, but it is supported underneath the chassis by some Audio Technica or similar compliant "feet". I always thought that this was the key to your satisfaction with that setup, rather than absence of a plinth per se. As for mounting the arm on a pod that is totally outboard from the chassis and not physically associated with it, I do think that is a bad idea. But to each his own; certainly a few tt-makers now do it that way too, altho I know of no vintage tts designed that way. In your earlier photos I got the impression that your tonearm is mounted on the plywood that also is forming a surround for your SP10, thereby creating a coupling of sorts between the two. I thought that was OK. Anyway, we can argue theory all day long. As you suggest, the proof of the pudding is in the listening. I still like slate; I think it's uniquely suited to this endeavor. I think slate is way better than some of the materials that have traditionally been used, e.g., wood, marble, granite.